Written Answers Friday 21 April 2006

Scottish Executive

Bridges

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-23877 by Tavish Scott on 16 March 2006, whether it will now consider commissioning an assessment of the annual cost to the Scottish economy caused by traffic delays as a result of the collection of tolls on the Forth and Tay road bridges.

Tavish Scott: Ministers are committed to taking forward a wider examination of the economic, social and environmental impact and cost of retaining or removing tolls from the Tay and Forth bridges, on Fife and Dundee. The proposals for this will be reported on as soon as possible.

Caledonian MacBrayne

Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether, in relation to the proposed tendering of Clyde and Hebridean Ferry Services, it has now developed a scheme in respect of pension provision for Caledonian MacBrayne (CalMac) staff and, if so, whether the scheme has been approved by the CalMac pension fund trustees, the company and the Pensions Regulator.

Tavish Scott: The Scottish Executive attaches great importance to the future of the CalMac workforce and is committed to protecting the pension position of transferring staff. The Executive is working closely with the CalMac pension fund trustees, Caledonian MacBrayne Limited and the Pension Regulator on the changes that are necessary to the CalMac pension fund as a consequence of the restructuring of Caledonian MacBrayne. Discussions are progressing well and there is a clear willingness on all sides to address the complex issues involved. The Executive will make a statement on the outcome of these discussions at the appropriate time.

Ferry Services

Jim Mather (Highlands and Islands) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what general principles it uses to set ferry subsidies and to justify the difference between existing and proposed subsidies.

Tavish Scott: The Scottish Executive treats each existing or proposed lifeline ferry contract on its merits, taking account of economic and social needs in formulating the service specification for the routes. On the basis of past experience, knowledge of the routes and research, the Executive is able to reach a broad conclusion on the likely subsidy levels required. This will reflect, for example, the type of vessels required, the route distances involved, the service levels required (e.g. in terms of frequency) and the fares to be charged. However, the final level of subsidy is determined through a competitive tendering process, required under European law, in which shipping operators bid for the subsidy contract.

  In cases where a service could not be seen as "lifeline", in that the communities involved are not wholly or mainly dependent on the service for their transport connections, a different approach may be taken. In such cases, a cap may be placed on the subsidy to be offered, reflecting, for example, the scale of economic benefits that the service would be expected to generate.

Housing

Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is content with indications that Communities Scotland regards the Scottish Tenants’ Organisation as a "former" organisation.

Johann Lamont: Members of the Scottish Tenants Organisation (STO) Steering Committee have told the Scottish Executive and Communities Scotland that the STO is not currently operating as a constituted body.

Mental Health

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-23237 by Lewis Macdonald on 14 March 2006, how many applications for a compulsory treatment order requiring to be heard under section 69 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 have not been heard by a tribunal panel because the Administration of the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland has failed to fix a hearing, broken down by reasons for the failure.

Lewis Macdonald: The Mental Health Tribunal has failed to hold a hearing under section 69 of the act on four occasions, within the statutory timescales i.e. within the 28 days of the original Short-Term Detention Certificate or the following five days allowed by the act. In one instance the case papers were overlooked within the tribunal until after the expiry of the Short-Term Detention, a hearing was then arranged as soon as practically possible, some eight working days after the expiry of the Short-Term Detention Certificate, rather than the five required by statute. In three further cases applications were received on the day of expiry of the Short-Term Detention Certificates, hearings were arranged as soon a practically possible in the venues preferred, in line with MHTS policy at the time (i.e. in the hospital in which the patient was detained so as to maximise participation and minimise stress). Following a Judicial Review that policy has now been changed so that when a venue is not available within the required timescales the hearing will be held at the next nearest available venue, or if that is not suitable at the Tribunal Suite in Bothwell House, Hamilton. In a further 14 cases hearings have been held a day later than required by the act, due to errors concerning the expiry dates of Short-Term Detention Certificates being made by Mental Health Officers.

Mental Health

Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many times the Administration of the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland has failed to fix a hearing where required to do so by the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, broken down by reasons for the failure.

Lewis Macdonald: Since the start of operations in October 2005 the Mental Health Tribunal has failed to fix a hearing in applications for Compulsory Treatment Orders within the Statutory time limit on 18 occasions. On four occasions this was due to the Tribunal Administration and in 14 cases the hearings were arranged based on the incorrect information on the original application. I refer the member to the answer to question S2W-24562, on 21 April 2006. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament’s website, the search facility for which can be found at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

  There have been several cases (estimated at around 10) where appeals against Short-Term Detention under paragraph 50 of the act have been received within a very short time of the expiry date of the Short-Term Detention Certificate. In these cases there has been insufficient time to arrange a hearing before the expiry of the Certificate. Consequently, the tribunal has declined to arrange a hearing. Full details of these cases have not to date been recorded, but they will be in the future. The president of the tribunal is currently considering the imposition of an administrative deadline for the convening of a hearing (most probably five days) in the absence of a statutory deadline. This would mean that appeals against Short-Term Detention would need to be received by the tribunal by the 23rd day of detention in order for a hearing to be held in the vast majority of cases.

NHS Waiting Lists

Tommy Sheridan (Glasgow) (SSP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many people are on waiting lists, held by the dental access centres in Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy, for registration with an NHS dentist in Fife.

Lewis Macdonald: The dental access centres in Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy provide a range of treatments to unregistered patients. They do not register patients, and therefore have no waiting lists for registration.

NHS Waiting Times

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-19618 by Mr Andy Kerr on 4 November 2005, what the average waiting times in weeks were, and how many patients were waiting, for a first appointment in the (a) child dental health, (b) conservation, (c) oral medication, (d) oral surgery, (e) orthodontics, (f) periodontology and (g) prosthodontics department in each dental hospital in each quarter since June 1999.

Lewis Macdonald: Information on waiting times and waiting lists for a first out-patient appointment following referral from a general medical or dental practitioner, is collected at specialty level only and not at hospital department level.

  Median waiting times for a first out-patient appointment with a consultant in the dental specialties, following a general medical or dental practitioner referral, at Dundee Dental Hospital and Edinburgh Dental Institute for each quarter since 30 September 1999 and at Glasgow Dental Hospital for each quarter since 30 June 2004, have been placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 39349).

  Dental out-patient waiting list information has only been collected centrally since 31 December 2004. Information on the number of patients waiting for a first out-patient appointment with a consultant in the dental specialties, following referral from a general medical or dental practitioner, at Dundee Dental Hospital and Edinburgh Dental Institute on 31 December 2004, 31 March 2005, 30 June 2005, 30 September 2005 and 31 December 2005, and at Glasgow Dental Hospital on 30 September 2005 and 31 December 2005, has been placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (Bib. number 39350).

Parliamentary Questions

Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S2W-21646 by Tavish Scott on 7 March 2006, why it took 85 days to respond, given that the decision to suspend the Glenmayne scheme had already been taken at least 25 days prior to the question being lodged on 12 December 2005.

Tavish Scott: Following completion of their due diligence, officials concluded in November 2005 that the scheme should not be taken forward. There followed a period of discussion and review in order that I could be satisfied that this decision was correct.

  Transport Scotland has the operational responsibility for this area, and can be contacted for more information if required.

Pensions

Carolyn Leckie (Central Scotland) (SSP): To ask the Scottish Executive, in light of the written ministerial statement by the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on the statutory redundancy payments scheme ( Official Report , House of Commons, 2 March 2006, Vol 443, c 39WS) which states that the EU Employment Directive "provides for the possibility of member states providing for different treatment on the grounds of age, where this difference of treatment is objectively and reasonably justified by a legitimate aim, including employment policy", whether it now considers that publication of the legal advice it has received in respect of the abolition of the rule of 85 is in the interests of (a) the public and (b) members of the local government pension scheme and whether it will provide a detailed rationale of the reasons for its position on the matter.

Mr Tom McCabe: I refer the member to the answer to question S2W-24591 on 20 April 2006. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/webapp/wa.search .

Scottish Executive Expenditure

Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will provide comparative data on total managed expenditure in cash terms for each year from 1996-97 to 2007-08, broken down by department.

Mr Tom McCabe: The information requested is shown in the following table.

  

Department
Outturn
1996-97
Outturn
1997-98
Outturn
1998-99
Outturn
1999-2000
Outturn
2000-01
Outturn
2001-02


ERAD
972
709
831
814
809
854


Development
531
520
553
538
583
664


Education
216
308
353
493
595
748


ETLLD
2,279
2,425
2,408
2,525
2,715
2,966


Health
4,405
4,568
4,809
5,065
5,421
6,052


Justice
764
803
806
879
906
961


Administration
170
148
159
170
176
197


GRO
2
6
5
5
10
18


National Archives
6
5
3
4
6
7


FCSD
5,431
5,188
5,212
5,287
5,404
5,933


Crown Office
47
47
51
52
55
64


Forestry
0
0
0
31
42
45


Food Standards
0
0
0
0
3
6


Scottish Parliament
0
0
7
45
63
87


Audit Scotland
0
0
0
0
4
4


Total
14,824
14,726
15,196
15,907
16,792
18,606



  

Department
(£ Million)
Outturn
2002-03
Outturn
2003-04
Outturn
2004-05
Plans
2005-06
Plans
2006-07
Plans
2007-08


ERAD
892
968
1,083
1,172
1,289
1,207


Development
711
777
807
850
915
960


Education
606
632
772
877
1,059
1,131


ETLLD
3,145
3,366
3,479
3,748
4,307
4,427


Health
6,571
7,157
8,173
8,631
9,160
9,985


Justice
1,034
1,129
1,165
1,368
1,451
1,514


Administration
193
206
227
240
221
221


GRO
7
6
5
7
9
9


National Archives
10
9
7
8
7
8


FCSD
6,753
7,543
7,568
7,919
8,071
8,251


Crown Office
79
84
85
89
96
97


Forestry
45
48
53
58
68
71


Food Standards
5
6
8
11
10
11


Scottish Parliament
148
182
163
66
69
72


Audit Scotland
6
6
8
8
7
7


Total
20,205
22,119
23,603
25,052
26,739
27,971



  Notes:

  1.Comparative Trend Data for years 1996-97 to 2005-06 was published on the Scottish Executive website in October 2004. This table updates the 2003-04 and 2004-05 numbers to reflect final outturn, the 2005-06 numbers to reflect the final budgets and adds numbers for 2006-07 and 2007-08.

  2. All numbers are shown on a cash and accruals basis (i.e. capital charges have been excluded)

  3. Transfers between departments have where possible been made for all 10 years on the basis of the 2004-05 position for comparability.

  4. Certain one-off expenditure and major transfers of responsibility (and funds) from Whitehall Departments have been excluded. These include:

  
Supporting People (£416/424/375/365/365 in 2003-08), and
Rail Infrastructure (£338/338 million in 2006-08).


  5. FCSD figures exclude Scottish Public Pensions Programme funds.

  6. The significant drop in the Rural Affairs Department numbers between 1996-97 and 1997-98 was mainly due to a drop in the Cap Market Support numbers of just under £100 million (the Cap Market Support number is agreed annually with the UK treasury, outside the Scottish block) and in the water authorities Level 2. In 1997-98, £95 million of North of Scotland Water Authority’s debt was commuted. The £95 million was funded by Treasury.

Scottish Executive Expenditure

Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will provide comparative data on total managed expenditure in real terms for each year from 1996-97 to 2007-08, broken down by department.

Mr Tom McCabe: The information requested is shown in the following table.

  

Department
Outturn
1996-97
Outturn
1997-98
Outturn
1998-99
Outturn
1999-2000
Outturn
2000-01
Outturn
2001-02


ERAD
1,176
833
951
914
897
924


Development
643
610
633
604
646
718


Education
262
362
405
554
660
809


ETLLD
2,757
2,848
2,757
2,835
3,009
3,209


Health
5,328
5,366
5,506
5,687
6,008
6,546


Justice
924
944
922
986
1,005
1,039


Administration
205
174
182
191
195
213


GRO
3
7
6
6
11
19


National Archives
7
5
3
4
7
8


FCSD
6,568
6,094
5,968
5,937
5,989
6,418


Crown Office
57
55
58
58
61
69


Forestry
0
0
0
34
46
48


Food Standards
0
0
0
0
3
6


Scottish Parliament
0
0
8
51
70
94


Audit Scotland
0
0
0
0
5
5


Total
17,928
17,299
17,399
17,862
18,612
20,124



  

Department
(£ Million)
Outturn
2002-03
Outturn
2003-04
Outturn
2004-05
Plans
2005-06
Plans
2006-07
Plans
2007-08


ERAD
935
989
1,083
1,148
1,232
1,124


Development
745
794
807
833
875
894


Education
635
645
772
859
1,012
1,053


ETLLD
3,297
3,438
3,479
3,671
4,117
4,123


Health
6,889
7,310
8,173
8,454
8,757
9,298


Justice
1,084
1,153
1,165
1,340
1,387
1,410


Administration
202
210
227
235
211
206


GRO
8
6
5
7
9
8


National Archives
11
9
7
8
7
7


FCSD
7,079
7,704
7,568
7,757
7,716
7,684


Crown Office
83
86
85
87
92
90


Forestry
47
49
53
57
65
66


Food Standards
5
6
8
11
10
10


Scottish Parliament
155
186
163
65
66
67


Audit Scotland
6
6
8
8
7
7


Total
21,182
22,591
23,603
24,539
25,562
26,048



  Notes:

  1.Comparative Trend Data for years 1996-97 to 2005-06 was published on the Scottish Executive website in October 2004. This table updates the 2003-04 and 2004-05 numbers to reflect final outturn, the 2005-06 numbers to reflect the final budgets and adds numbers for 2006-07 and 2007-08.

  2. All numbers are shown on a cash and accruals basis (i.e. capital charges have been excluded)

  3. Transfers between departments have where possible been made for all 10 years on the basis of the 2004-05 position for comparability.

  4. Certain one-off expenditure and major transfers of responsibility (and funds) from Whitehall Departments have been excluded. These include:

  
Supporting People (£416/424/375/365/365 in 2003-08), and
Rail Infrastructure (£338/338 million in 2006-08).


  5. FCSD figures exclude Scottish Public Pensions Programme funds.

  6. The significant drop in the rural affairs numbers between 1996-97 and 1997-98 was mainly due to a drop in the Cap Market Support numbers of just under £100 million (the Cap Market Support number is agreed annually with the UK treasury, outside the Scottish block) and in the water authorities Level 2. In 1997-98, £95 million of North of Scotland Water Authority’s debt was commuted. The £95 million was funded by Treasury.

  7. Figures at 2004-05 prices using GDP deflators as at 23 December 2005.

Transport

Jim Mather (Highlands and Islands) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it will take to increase the affordability of travel to and from the highlands and islands from Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Inverness for non-residents of the islands or Caithness.

Tavish Scott: The Scottish Executive provides very significant funding for all modes of public transport, including for the airports operated by Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd (HIAL) and for air routes subsidised under Public Service Obligations, which benefits all travellers to and from the Highlands and Islands. Assistance to HIAL in 2005-06 is estimated at £22.1 million and for Lifeline Air Services is similarly estimated at £1.2 million.

  In addition, we have consistently restricted Caledonian MacBrayne’s annual fares increases in line with inflation. NorthLink’s annual fares increases have also been restricted on a similar basis under arrangements in the Northern Isles lifeline ferry contract. The new Northern Isles contract, and the proposed contract for the Clyde and Hebrides lifeline ferry services, will contain similar restrictions. Assistance to CalMac in 2005-06 is estimated at £31.4 million and to NorthLink is similarly estimated at £26.0 million.

  The ScotRail franchise subsidy is not easily broken down route by route. However, a proportionate sum is applied to ensure that regulated fares, including saver fares, are maintained at a reasonable level with the franchisee restricted in the amount by which these fares can be increased.

Correction

The reply to question S2W-23897, which was originally answered on 20 March 2006, has been corrected: see page 7766 or http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/pqa/wa-06/wa0420.htm.